Review: The skinny on the iPad mini—it’s not the size that counts

The display is a different story—one that could be the deciding factor.

Former Apple CEO Steve Jobs famously trashed 7" tablets as being "dead in the water" in 2010. Two years later, under the reign of new CEO Tim Cook, Apple has released its own miniature tablet—one that has a diagonal screen measurement of 7.9", which Apple considers vastly different from what's offered by similar small tablets.

"Apple has done extensive user testing on user interfaces over many years, and we really understand this stuff," Jobs said in 2010. Indeed, Apple believes the new iPad mini is superior in every way to its 7" competition, yet still offers the full iPad experience—just in a smaller package. "Every inch an iPad," reads Apple's product page for the iPad mini.

But is it really? In the weeks leading up to the iPad mini's release, Ars readers from all walks of life made it overwhelmingly clear that their main concern is the device's usability as it compares to the full-sized iPad. How's the screen? What are apps like when shrunken down? How long can you hold it without fatigue? Is it really a high-quality iPad experience, like that of the third- or fourth-generation iPad?

As such, those iPad-centered usability experiences are what I focused on most when writing this review. Ars readers were also curious about the iPad mini compared against some of the more popular Android alternatives (namely the Nexus 7 and Kindle Fire). Those tablets didn't play a dominant role in my evaluation of the iPad mini, but they are part of the discussion when appropriate. It's also important to note this review is slightly different from past iPad reviews, because the iPad mini's internal specs are so similar to that of the iPad 2, which we reviewed in 2011.

So, what is the iPad mini really like to use in everyday life? Let's go through some of the technical details of the $329 Wi-Fi-only iPad mini first, then dive into the usability experience of a tablet that is "every inch an iPad," but smaller.

Physical design

Third-gen iPad on the left, iPad mini on the right.

Apple's party line is that the iPad mini is indeed a small iPad, but it's certainly no 7" tablet. Tim Cook recently said on the company's fourth quarter conference call that the iPad mini is "not a compromised product like the 7-inch tablets." He's consistently implied the iPad mini is much more—not only because it is technically larger than 7" tablets, but because its functional usability is different.

I'll get to the usability later, but for now let's focus on measurements and specs. Again, the iPad mini is technically not a 7" tablet like the Kindle Fire HD or a Nexus 7. But it runs in the same crowd: its dimensions are 7.87" x 5.3" x 0.28" (or 0.29" for Wi-Fi + Cellular). By comparison, the Kindle Fire HD 7" is 7.44" x 4.72" x 0.45" and the Nexus 7 is 7.81" x 4.72" x 0.41". If you want to compare against a full-sized iPad, the fourth-generation iPad is 9.5" x 7.31" x 0.37".

When put into perspective, this makes the iPad mini almost the same height as a Nexus 7, but almost a half-inch wider and about 2/3 the thickness of the Nexus 7. This is almost the same for the Kindle Fire HD 7", except that device is a bit shorter—the iPad mini is almost a half-inch taller when making this comparison.

Third-gen iPad on the left, iPad mini on the right

When comparing against other Apple products, iPad mini is the thinnest tablet the company has made yet. The iPad mini is thinner than even the iPhone 5, but the iPod touch wins out as thinnest iOS device on the market.

iPad mini on the left, Kindle Fire on the right.

Apple likes to brag that part of the reason the iPad mini is superior to similarly-sized tablets is its screen real estate. The iPad mini has roughly 35 percent more screen real estate than other 7" tablets, and Apple claims the usable area is 50 to 67 percent larger. This point may seem like nitpicking until you look at the iPad mini next to a competing device (in my case, a Kindle Fire). The point is really driven home here—although the UIs are obviously different, the iPad mini's screen does have a good amount more real estate than 7" tablets. (Keep in mind that some 7" tablets do sport higher-density displays; more on that below.)

In terms of weight, the iPad mini competes well. The Wi-Fi version is 0.68 pounds (308g), while the Wi-Fi + Cellular version is 0.69 pounds (312 grams). This is less than both the Nexus 7, which comes in at 0.75 pounds (340g), and the Kindle Fire HD 7", which is nearly 0.87 pounds (395g). And of course, it's quite a bit less than the full-sized iPad: the fourth-generation device is 1.44 pounds (652g), making the iPad mini less than half the weight. This certainly plays into its long-term "holdability," which I'll address more directly in the usability part of this review.

Left to right: Third-gen iPad, iPad mini, Kindle Fire

But overall, the iPad mini is still just an iPad. It has stereo speaker grilles on the bottom along with a new Lightning port. The volume button is on the right side, along with the mute/screen lock switch. The top has the lock button and a headphone jack. Contrary to constant rumors, Apple still included the Home button on the front of the device (though it does seem to travel a little more when you click it, compared to other iOS devices).

Jacqui Cheng
Jacqui is an Editor at Large at Ars Technica, where she has spent the last eight years writing about Apple culture, gadgets, social networking, privacy, and more. Emailjacqui@arstechnica.com//Twitter@eJacqui

188 Reader Comments

It really does look like Apple pushed this product out the door to combat the competition. I'm sure if they could have put a Retina display in, they would have. I'll be waiting for the iPad Mini Retina 2.

I have no problems with Apple products even though I occasionally find issue with the company itself, and the only hurdle I have ever truly found in my attempts to own an Apple product is the price. Considering the fact that there seems to be competitors to this product at significantly lower prices I myself have to say that the price more than anything else prevents me from buying this product.

The complaints about the lack of a retina display misses the point that if they had gone that route, it would have been a resolution that was not a multiple of 1024x768, creating havoc for developers and users expecting iPad apps to work on it alike. Doubling the resolution creates issues around touch usability.

I have no problems with Apple products even though I occasionally find issue with the company itself, and the only hurdle I have ever truly found in my attempts to own an Apple product is the price. Considering the fact that there seems to be competitors to this product at significantly lower prices I myself have to say that the price more than anything else prevents me from buying this product.

To me that is "bad."

A quick check of Apple store shows that refurbed iPad 3 is going for $380, a good deal compared to the mini.

Disapointing about the screen and guts, and hilarious how they touted resolution over screen area while talking about Retina then switched gears completely when talking about the Mini and compared its screen area to the N7, despite the significantly lower PPI.

There should at least be an A6 in there, I'd even settle for a die shrunk A5X since it comes with more RAM, this is a pretty old SoC and low amount of RAM now. I'm sure the "specs don't matter" crowd will take issue with that, but low RAM has always led to early retirement for iDevices. Looks like a "wait for next gen" for me, or better yet get the refurbished third gen.

The complaints about the lack of a retina display misses the point that if they had gone that route, it would have been a resolution that was not a multiple of 1024x768, creating havoc for developers and users expecting iPad apps to work on it alike. Doubling the resolution creates issues around touch usability.

The complaints about the lack of a retina display misses the point that if they had gone that route, it would have been a resolution that was not a multiple of 1024x768, creating havoc for developers and users expecting iPad apps to work on it alike. Doubling the resolution creates issues around touch usability.

No, they could have just doubled it to 2048x1536, same as its big brother. It would have ended up with a higher PPI than the iPad 3/4, but so does the iPhone.

I have no problems with Apple products even though I occasionally find issue with the company itself, and the only hurdle I have ever truly found in my attempts to own an Apple product is the price. Considering the fact that there seems to be competitors to this product at significantly lower prices I myself have to say that the price more than anything else prevents me from buying this product.

To me that is "bad."

The two primary competitors are both selling their wares at cost (possibly at a loss overall). It is difficult to say what impact their actions will make on the computer hardware industry as a whole, not just Apple. I'm personally not convinced that Amazon and Google's "race at the bottom" is either healthy or sustainable. I expect to hear more labor horror stories coming out of China, Viet Nam, and (North!) Korea, as manufacturers are pushed to and past their break-even points and suppliers are pressured to bring in products at impossibly low margins. To me, that is very "bad", and I fully expect it to happen in the current pricing climate. I deplore what has happened at Foxconn, yet I can't help but think that it represents the tip of the iceberg, and that we're hearing of the Foxconn stories because conditions there allow the stories to get out at all.

I am personally much more comfortable buying a product that has some profit built into the price, where there is some room and hope for profit to be passed down the supplier chain and eventually for labor conditions to improve, even if that improvement is due to customers applying social pressure on the vendor in order for that to occur. There is zero hope for that when the vendor operates at or below cost, and constantly applies pressure to suppliers to shave margins ever thinner. And less hope for that zero-profilt vendor's competitors, who must somehow find ways to match that artificially low price or leave the market.

I have no problems with Apple products even though I occasionally find issue with the company itself, and the only hurdle I have ever truly found in my attempts to own an Apple product is the price. Considering the fact that there seems to be competitors to this product at significantly lower prices I myself have to say that the price more than anything else prevents me from buying this product.

To me that is "bad."

A quick check of Apple store shows that refurbed iPad 3 is going for $380, a good deal compared to the mini.

I love an ipad 3 personally, but it doesn't really have a use for me that something else already fulfills admirably. I am much more interested in the 7" to 7.9" category due to the mobility of the device.

When I am home, nothing can trump my desktop setup. I am already on my couch, reclined, and in full-relaxation mode, with my arms resting naturally and comfortably. Nothing matches either the comfort or the power that offers me.

When I am on the go I want to keep it light and simple. Something that can be on my person at all times, utilizing my pocket as a carrier for example. My phone does this somewhat, but is a tad too small to give me a full experience. Laptops and previous tablets have failed me due to their size.

Now that we have a true "intermediate" device on the market, I am for the first time interested in picking one up, but like I had stated previously the price premium on this device relative to it's specs in it's class is a barrier to my sensibilities, and to my wallet.

Honestly, I would like a tablet in the 7" form that also had a cell radio in it. I could keep it in my pocket or on my desk, use a headset for calls, and pull it out for media consumption, ditching my cellphone entirely. But I digress, that is my fantasy, not yours.

Also worth noting is I am a bigger guy, with pockets that easily fit devices like this, which may be my main attraction to them in the first place.

Also of note is the fact that I would rather keep hitting myself in the face with a smaller tablet as I drift between reading and being unconscious, which is always where I wind up when I read before bed.

Yay, stereo speakers!(that are at same exact place .. so you have to stick your nose into the lightning port to get the slightest of stereo effects .. well not really)

STUPID expensive piece of low tech crap!!!

While I wouldn't have chosen your use of words, I do agree with this. What is the point of stereo sound when the speakers are so close together? Just to be first? Or does the user actually enjoy a full stereo experience when using the device in a normal way? This is something I would like to know personally. If it works, why aren't other devices giving us this useful feature?

I waited on the Mini before I was going to decide on a 7" tablet. I have tried one out and at the same time I was able to give the Nexus 7 a try also. I am glad I waited not because I am going to get the Mini but the Nexus 7 increased its storage capacity. I found the Mini to be awkward to hold, heavy, less then acceptable resolution, slow and overpriced. I am not a fan of any particular products but on the tablet front I am buying the Nexus 7. The price, performance and feel of the Nexus is just a better product for the money. I own some Apple products and my phone is an Android so I am not partial to any company but I buy what I think is the best for the money I want to spend and in the 7" tablet market I just think the Mini is not even close to being worth the money. I was expecting a lot more from Apple and the Mini is a disappointment.

It really does look like Apple pushed this product out the door to combat the competition. I'm sure if they could have put a Retina display in, they would have. I'll be waiting for the iPad Mini Retina 2.

Don't you see? Apple intentionally left out the retina display so they could have something "magical" and "revolutionary" to introduce in the iPad mini 2!

While I wouldn't have chosen your use of words, I do agree with this. What is the point of stereo sound when the speakers are so close together? Just to be first? Or does the user actually enjoy a full stereo experience when using the device in a normal way? This is something I would like to know personally. If it works, why aren't other devices giving us this useful feature?

I have no problems with Apple products even though I occasionally find issue with the company itself, and the only hurdle I have ever truly found in my attempts to own an Apple product is the price. Considering the fact that there seems to be competitors to this product at significantly lower prices I myself have to say that the price more than anything else prevents me from buying this product.

To me that is "bad."

The two primary competitors are both selling their wares at cost (possibly at a loss overall). It is difficult to say what impact their actions will make on the computer hardware industry as a whole, not just Apple. I'm personally not convinced that Amazon and Google's "race at the bottom" is either healthy or sustainable. I expect to hear more labor horror stories coming out of China, Viet Nam, and (North!) Korea, as manufacturers are pushed to and past their break-even points and suppliers are pressured to bring in products at impossibly low margins. To me, that is very "bad", and I fully expect it to happen in the current pricing climate. I deplore what has happened at Foxconn, yet I can't help but think that it represents the tip of the iceberg, and that we're hearing of the Foxconn stories because conditions there allow the stories to get out at all.

I am personally much more comfortable buying a product that has some profit built into the price, where there is some room and hope for profit to be passed down the supplier chain and eventually for labor conditions to improve, even if that improvement is due to customers applying social pressure on the vendor in order for that to occur. There is zero hope for that when the vendor operates at or below cost, and constantly applies pressure to suppliers to shave margins ever thinner. And less hope for that zero-profilt vendor's competitors, who must somehow find ways to match that artificially low price or leave the market.

Don't worry too much about the prices. The rest of the world is more than making up for the cheap prices in the US. Amazon, Google, etc. are all selling their tablets 50 percent more expensive everywhere in the world, except in the US.

The two primary competitors are both selling their wares at cost (possibly at a loss overall). It is difficult to say what impact their actions will make on the computer hardware industry as a whole, not just Apple. I'm personally not convinced that Amazon and Google's "race at the bottom" is either healthy or sustainable. I expect to hear more labor horror stories coming out of China, Viet Nam, and (North!) Korea, as manufacturers are pushed to and past their break-even points and suppliers are pressured to bring in products at impossibly low margins. To me, that is very "bad", and I fully expect it to happen in the current pricing climate. I deplore what has happened at Foxconn, yet I can't help but think that it represents the tip of the iceberg, and that we're hearing of the Foxconn stories because conditions there allow the stories to get out at all.

What you are describing is exactly what happened to Foxconn plants making Apple products. Turned out that almost all the profit went to Apple.

Not saying that it only happens to Apple, but it's very obvious that just because a company is making tons of money doesn't mean that it'll do the right thing. So making money by itself is an entirely inadequate requisite for better treatment of third world laborers.

Ok.. So, this is gonna get downvoted hard... but it is honestly how I feel about this one.I've been using one quite a bit (I don't own one, but I have used it, and the Ipad 3 enough) to say:It's *Just* another iPad (but smaller). Features? You win some you lose some. Excellent product, but nothing to get too excited about.

The two primary competitors are both selling their wares at cost (possibly at a loss overall). It is difficult to say what impact their actions will make on the computer hardware industry as a whole, not just Apple. I'm personally not convinced that Amazon and Google's "race at the bottom" is either healthy or sustainable. I expect to hear more labor horror stories coming out of China, Viet Nam, and (North!) Korea, as manufacturers are pushed to and past their break-even points and suppliers are pressured to bring in products at impossibly low margins. To me, that is very "bad", and I fully expect it to happen in the current pricing climate. I deplore what has happened at Foxconn, yet I can't help but think that it represents the tip of the iceberg, and that we're hearing of the Foxconn stories because conditions there allow the stories to get out at all.

I am personally much more comfortable buying a product that has some profit built into the price, where there is some room and hope for profit to be passed down the supplier chain and eventually for labor conditions to improve, even if that improvement is due to customers applying social pressure on the vendor in order for that to occur. There is zero hope for that when the vendor operates at or below cost, and constantly applies pressure to suppliers to shave margins ever thinner. And less hope for that zero-profilt vendor's competitors, who must somehow find ways to match that artificially low price or leave the market.

Very sensible and insightful. Maybe I have my history wrong, but I thought our anti-trust laws were written to prevent this very kind of behavior because it led to monopolies (like Rockefeller's) that were subsequently abused. No doubt selling oil and selling computers aren't too similar but I still don't think it should be considered a legitimate business practice to sell product at cost/loss as a kind of investment in securing monopoly power.

While I wouldn't have chosen your use of words, I do agree with this. What is the point of stereo sound when the speakers are so close together? Just to be first? Or does the user actually enjoy a full stereo experience when using the device in a normal way? This is something I would like to know personally. If it works, why aren't other devices giving us this useful feature?

its for added volume not spacial effects.

Then surely this is useful, and perhaps something competitors should look at come later revisions. I didn't look at it that way, thank you for the input friend.

Yay, stereo speakers!(that are at same exact place .. so you have to stick your nose into the lightning port to get the slightest of stereo effects .. well not really)

STUPID expensive piece of low tech crap!!!

While I wouldn't have chosen your use of words, I do agree with this. What is the point of stereo sound when the speakers are so close together? Just to be first? Or does the user actually enjoy a full stereo experience when using the device in a normal way? This is something I would like to know personally. If it works, why aren't other devices giving us this useful feature?

Except that there were reviews criticizing the mini for the lack of those speakers. Which is why someone went and asked Mr Schiller specifically whether it had them.

Personally, I wish there was one on each short-end of the iPads, so that when you're watching a movie, the sound isn't just from the one side (sometimes I'll show a movie to my nephew and nieces when they're bored).

I found the Mini to be awkward to hold, heavy, less then acceptable resolution, slow and overpriced. I am not a fan of any particular products but on the tablet front I am buying the Nexus 7. The price, performance and feel of the Nexus is just a better product for the money.

How did you find the Mini to be "heavy"? It weighs less than the Nexus 7! Also, what was slow about it?

I have no problems with Apple products even though I occasionally find issue with the company itself, and the only hurdle I have ever truly found in my attempts to own an Apple product is the price. Considering the fact that there seems to be competitors to this product at significantly lower prices I myself have to say that the price more than anything else prevents me from buying this product.

To me that is "bad."

My sentiment exactly. I'd much rather spend money on something different but equally good at a much lower price, and hoard the rest of my money for the coming (ongoing?) economic apocalypse.

I would personally like more detail on the Bluetooth KB experience. I have an iPad 3 and one of those little Apple Bluetooth keyboards. I find that when I am using it with the iPad, it's really quite bad- it seems to lag behind my typing (and I am hardly the worlds most speedy typist), and get a load of key doubling.

I was curious as to whether the problem lay in the iPad's stack or the keyboard. I tried pairing it with my Nexus 7, and all the problems went away, I could type away like a herd of miniature jackhammers as I liked. I saw no lag problems or unexplained key doubling. Because of this, I suspect that something is sucky in iOS land..

We bought our first iPad in September 2011, for our daughter's 4th birthday (meant for all of us to use, but mainly for her). She plays educational games on it and watches kids movies and cartoons. As a one TV household, this becomes a godsend when 60 Minutes or Top Gear comes on. The full-sized iPad in an Otter rugged case works great as a "laptop" device for her. When she lays down on the couch and props it against her knees, she often causes it to fall back (hitting her in the nose).

The iPad Mini would have been a more sensible choice for the way the current iPad at home gets used. It's half the weight and a lot more manageable for small hands. I know this isn't Apple's core market demographic for the Mini, but I think the size, weight and lower price might tip the scales for more adoption amongst the educational market.

One side benefit of IOS use by our 5yo (on the iPad and our iPhones).....she easily transferred those skills to an HP TouchSmart 20" All-In-One computer in the kitchen. She has a hard time with the two button mouse but since she can also navigate by touch on the screen (learned on the iPad), she's playing games on nickjr.com and learning on abcmouse.com

If there were no engineering tradeoffs, I'd wish for a retina display, too. I certainly like the retina display on my iPad 3.

But... the iPad 3 is heavier than the iPad 2 to wedge in extra battery, and the processor spends many more cycles moving around all those extra pixels. It sounds like Apple wanted the mini to be small and lightweight. I don't know if their wizards could have pulled that off --- yet --- using a retina display. It would have taken more battery power, maybe a different processor, and likely more sluggish responsiveness.

There could be cost issues, too, if those extra-large 3GS panels are appreciably cheaper than similarly sized 4/4S/5 panels. But I suspect they could have made the dollars work. The extra size and weight, however, might not have been easily overcome. The iPad mini with retina display might turn out to be $100 more, heavier, and bigger.

The two primary competitors are both selling their wares at cost (possibly at a loss overall). It is difficult to say what impact their actions will make on the computer hardware industry as a whole, not just Apple. I'm personally not convinced that Amazon and Google's "race at the bottom" is either healthy or sustainable. I expect to hear more labor horror stories coming out of China, Viet Nam, and (North!) Korea, as manufacturers are pushed to and past their break-even points and suppliers are pressured to bring in products at impossibly low margins. To me, that is very "bad", and I fully expect it to happen in the current pricing climate. I deplore what has happened at Foxconn, yet I can't help but think that it represents the tip of the iceberg, and that we're hearing of the Foxconn stories because conditions there allow the stories to get out at all.

What you are describing is exactly what happened to Foxconn plants making Apple products. Turned out that almost all the profit went to Apple.

Not saying that it only happens to Apple, but it's very obvious that just because a company is making tons of money doesn't mean that it'll do the right thing. So making money by itself is an entirely inadequate requisite for better treatment of third world laborers.

This is all true, but there is evidence that the Koreans are far, far less merciful in their labor arrangements. Apple is under a lot of scrutiny that doesn't occur to the low cost Asian OEMs and their assemblers. It's important to understand what we support with our money, and it's a lot of bad things, based on the news, primarily around chocolate, fish and electronics.

I think Apple made the ipad mini too big and too good. I know they're not afraid of cannibalization, and this is part of their quest to conquer consumer PCs, but it really feels too soon. The MBA was too soon, but that was because the tech wasn't there. In this case, sacrificing on the (still very usable) screen doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice for the price-conscious, even with the Nook HD out there (top budget tablet screen currently afaict). It's definitely not as much of a sacrifice as, say, the first nanos, who were cramped on storage or the first iphone as a phone (battery life).

It has all the software support, sacrifices some font size and is lighter, thinner, more portable. It seems like a better fit for consumers. As for businesses, they've standardized around the larger form factors, so I think the ipad will turn into more of a 'pro' line.

Nothing about the lack of GPS? I find I'm using the GPS a fair amount on my Nexus 7.

Like all iPads, the WiFi only models don't have GPS while the 3G/LTE models do, another reason to get you to bump up if you want to use it for navigation. Since Apple uses assisted GPS those cell antenna are necessary.

I'm wondering whether it's a missed opportunity to make the iPad mini a complete in-between device between the iPhone and iPad - in other words, add an ear piece to the mini and the phone app, and basically you'd have an iPhone maxi.

The iPhone was a revelation in what you could do with a phone, and we all know how bad it is to carry around more than one device, and even though it may be a large phone and a small tablet, I wouldn't mind this too much.

So perhaps along with adding a retina display, they should put the iPhone's earpiece and add iOS's phone app with the LTE modems and sell a 'premium' iPad mini/iPhone maxi that is the best of both worlds: an iPhone with a large screen and an iPad that's a phone... might be an interesting discussion...